Letters to the Editor: 8-4-12

Dear Editor:

I wrote to you about your K.I.S.S. acronym. In the interest of civility, respect and Keeping It Short and Simple, WE need to encourage all to do just that. Another similar term is: “Less is More” but NEITHER term is appropriate as to the Town of Pegram election. That may be the reason that the other “S” was added.

Where do WE go from here?

Art Asbury

Pegram

Dear Editor,

The front page story in the July 28 Advocate directed readers to a “survey” of TN house District 78 political candidates printed elsewhere in that issue that was conducted by a Mr. Roger Small. The story described Small as wanting voters “to be able to make an intelligent choice as to who would represent them in the Tennessee State Legislature”. Fortunately, the story did tell enough about Small for an intelligent voter to expect that the survey they were being asked to read would have a right-wing slant. In fact, Small’s “survey” would have been far better described as an ad for the GOP platform. While it contained a few questions addressing the candidates’ knowledge of state and federal laws, a legitimate and non-partisan survey would not have included obviously biased and inflammatory questions, nor would a legitimate survey have included commentary. He did not include the candidates’ answers to his questions if they involved more than a “yes or no” answer. Small himself decided whether each candidate’s questions were “answered correctly”, according to his own strict right-wing viewpoint. Several of his questions were totally irrelevant to whether the candidate could effectively represent the people of House District 78. His “notes” utilized as footnotes to questions were clearly statements of his opinions, many of which were certainly not statements of facts. It is particularly interesting to note that he did not ask a single question addressing what the candidates proposed to do to bring more jobs to our largely rural district, or to improve the Tennessee economy – issues that are the real concerns of voters. Neither did he inquire as to how candidates would vote regarding limits on corporate campaign spending, or the TN Legislature’s efforts to squash consumer protections. Out of 49 questions, only four were even related to economics, and those four only asked the candidates to define basic accounting statements and principles – not how they intended to incorporate any of those into their voting.

If Small truly wanted the people of South Cheatham County to be able to make intelligent choices and become factually informed voters, he would have provided non-partisan questions and allowed the candidates to explain every answer in detail if needed. Instead, his questions were worded in a manner to pigeonhole each candidate into a “we’re either for ya or agin ya” mentality. Small could have saved a lot of ink by summarizing his “survey” into a single question: “If elected, do you pledge to fully support and vote for only the most ultra-conservative right-wing agenda, and damn the rights of everyone else?”

Many politically sensitive issues among voters are complex and cannot be debated as simple black vs. white issues; there are many shades of gray. It is too bad that many voters will accept the agenda perpetrated by the so-called “survey” as fact, and make no effort to separate facts from fiction. For someone who supposedly claims to despise “Political Double Speak”, Roger Small certainly is full of it. Everyone has a right to their opinions, and I believe that the individual freedoms that are based in our constitution end when they impose on the rights of others to exercise their own freedom. In this case, I also believe that to portray the opinions of one man as a basis of facts to be relied upon in a supposedly unbiased news publication is a grave error.

It has been my understanding that when it comes to political campaigns, The Advocate accepts only paid advertising. However, I did not find any information anywhere on this full two page ad insert stating whether Mr. Small paid for this ad, which was clearly slanted to support a far right-wing political agenda. If he did not pay for it, who did? Or is my understanding incorrect? Perhaps the article and survey did, in fact, provide more truth than I expected – that The Advocate is a far more biased publication than I had thought.

Linda Swindle

Kingston Springs

Dear madam Editor,

I want to add a bit of background on the topic I introduced last week – the evils of governmental gun control. Many readers will have little knowledge of the historical significance of controlling firearms.

One modern European country’s government actually issues every household a firearm (a rifle). Then they train each adult in that household how to shoot and maintain that rifle.

That’s Switzerland, where no modern aggressor has ever dared to enter uninvited, not even Hitler! The Swiss, by the way, have the lowest gun related crime rate of any civilized country in the world! You see, the final weapon is not the gun, it’s the brain.

In World War Two, Japan never dared invade America, because they knew most Americans were armed! But the Soviet Union established gun control in 1929.

From that year through 1953 almost 20 million dissidents (people who spoke out) UNABLE TO DEFEND THEMSELVES, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1911, Turkey established gun control. By 1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Germany bought into gun control in 1938. Between then and 1945, 13 million people unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

In 1935 China established gun control. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissenters, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

Ugandan government abolished gun ownership in 1970. They had no trouble at all rounding up and exterminating 300,000 Christians, while the world watched.

Anyone who was educated in Cambodia, was rounded up, after guns were banned there in 1956, and by 1975, ONE MILLION educated people, unable to defend themselves, had been systematically rounded up and exterminated.

Don’t let your government make every law abiding citizen a target! Gun control laws affect ONLY law abiding citizens!

Remember the 56 million people who were victims of 20th century gun control.

The police were no help anywhere! Police protection is an oxymoron! They will do nothing until after you’ve been made a victim. That’s reality!

Typically, they neither protect nor defend.

Col. Michael Harley

Kingston Springs

Are you paying attention to the disasters that are going on in our government?

The Fast and Furious project that is responsible for the deaths of several people. One being a border agent, another is the brother of Mexico’s attorney general. Also several guns have been found at murders both in the US and Mexico.

And when authorities try to investigate the Obama administration stalls at every request for information. I would think it is in the best interest of our country to find out how this came to be. Any records or emails should be readily provided. It puzzles me why the attorney general or the head of Home Land Security didn’t know anything about it until it was published in the newspaper. If I was either of these people I would have someone’s head on a plate for not keeping me in the info loop. But Obama is using executive privilege to protect Eric Holder and Janet Napolitano and to avoid answering questions that we the American people are entitled to have answered.

Another issue that is very troubling is the leak of classified information that comes directly from the White House. Why would you not want to find out who is doing this? It’s another case of trying to sweep it under the rug.

The question is do we really want four more years of this?

Look up Obama’s 2006 speech to the US Senate on debt limit. This is a direct quote from that speech: “The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Governments reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America’s debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means “the buck stops here”. Instead Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. America deserves better.”

Wonder why he is following the same path that he was so quick to criticize in 2006. This man will say anything do anything to get reelected; will blame anything or anyone to avoid taking blame for his own failures.

Please examine your Presidential vote carefully.

Margaret Verran

Kingston Springs

* The S. C. Advocate’s Letters to the Editor contain the expressed and sole opinion of the writer. They do not necessarily express the opinion of the paper’s Editor or staff, nor have the “facts” contained in them been checked.